Now that MiG-21 will be in MAC...

So, apparently the MiG-21 without a cliackable cockpit will be in the upcoming Modern Air Combat.

As with other FC3 planes, despite the lack of advanced system modeling, the flight model shuould be up to scratch and as realistic as the FM on the full blown modules.

Does this mean that ED is going to take charge and fix issues with the MiG-21 FM, engine and damage model?

That would be great, I suppose those changes should then be ported to the "full fidelity" version, otherwise there would be MiG-21s with different FMs flying around the same server...

I don't think ED will do anything on the MiG-21. Pretty sure this is up to LNS, even for MAC.

Does this mean that ED is going to take charge and fix issues with the MiG-21 FM...

Nope.

Nope.

Well, that sucks. No justice for this amazing aircraft (and those who bought it!) :doh:

What comes to Mig-21Bis, I can't trust anymore at all to its flight modeling no matter who is developing it. Because it has changed so many times from one end to another in a circle. Meaning you just can't know what is the real deal. Real pilots gave their blessing, then it got radically changed. Real pilots gave blessing, and again huge change. Like only way to get the Mig-21Bis flight experience is to actually go to fly the real thing.

That is why I don't touch that jet anymore, when some developers say "no it is not going to be fixed" it is either a translation error from "changed" or it literally means it is known to be broken but doesn't get fixed.

But for DCS: Mig-21Bis and MAC users in multiplayer, only thing that should matter is that it is same flight modeling, broken or not.

What comes to Mig-21Bis, I can't trust anymore at all to its flight modeling no matter who is developing it. Because it has changed so many times from one end to another in a circle. Meaning you just can't know what is the real deal. Real pilots gave their blessing, then it got radically changed. Real pilots gave blessing, and again huge change. Like only way to get the Mig-21Bis flight experience is to actually go to fly the real thing.

 

That is why I don't touch that jet anymore, when some developers say "no it is not going to be fixed" it is either a translation error from "changed" or it literally means it is known to be broken but doesn't get fixed.

 

But for DCS: Mig-21Bis and MAC users in multiplayer, only thing that should matter is that it is same flight modeling, broken or not.

I feel exactly the same as you, I was hoping ED woudl fix it given they're including it in a product that is sold directly by them... oh well, it seems the MiG-21 will stay in the hangar forever :cry:

What comes to Mig-21Bis, I can't trust anymore at all to its flight modeling no matter who is developing it. Because it has changed so many times from one end to another in a circle. Meaning you just can't know what is the real deal. Real pilots gave their blessing, then it got radically changed. Real pilots gave blessing, and again huge change. Like only way to get the Mig-21Bis flight experience is to actually go to fly the real thing.

 

That is why I don't touch that jet anymore, when some developers say "no it is not going to be fixed" it is either a translation error from "changed" or it literally means it is known to be broken but doesn't get fixed.

 

But for DCS: Mig-21Bis and MAC users in multiplayer, only thing that should matter is that it is same flight modeling, broken or not.

The flight model coder and head of M3 (Dolphin887) is actually an active service MiG-21 pilot (at least he was at the time the MiG-21 was released).

The flight model coder and head of M3 (Dolphin887) is actually an active service MiG-21 pilot (at least he was at the time the MiG-21 was released).

--

I usually post from my phone so please excuse any typos, inappropriate punctuation and capitalization, missing words and general lack of cohesion and sense in my posts.....

I am with Fri13 on this one. Dolphin887 being an active duty MiG-21Bis pilot is cool and all, but after nth radically different flight model, this ceased to hold much water as an argument.

If anything, makes the situation more appalling.

Dolphin created the 21Bis FM as best as possible based on charts and his own experiences. He combined the two resulting in mixed feelings from users.

The FM went through so many changes because (although a simulation), he wanted to keep a fun factor in it. The 21Bis is not an easy aircraft to fly at all, despite its simplicity in the cockpit. And he took that into consideration, so he adjusted the FM. Yet, user still complained, so he adjusted it more to user likings; and thus other users complained because it may not be to their liking. So he adjusts it again, and the same continues guys.

Then there are the users explaining their results based on manuals, hear-say, videos, etc. Or even their own experiences as maintenance crew. Although great research is being presented, it does not always beat a pilot's experiences. And that's what Novak wanted users to feel. How a pilot does. Not only is he a pilot, but he trained others, and I'm pretty sure he put the student through their paces.

Now...ED asked for flight Data. So he flew the real aircraft and recorded actual data (cross checked with DCS 21Bis), providing it to ED and proving that FM is at it's best. ED cares greatly about the FM of any aircraft in DCS. In the past 6 years, we haven't heard anything from ED regarding any FM errors.

MIG-21 flight model history.

Then just set it as realistic as possible, with no changes for "gameplay" or "fun", and leave it at that!

Then just set it as realistic as possible, with no changes for "gameplay" or "fun", and leave it at that!

I'll have to echo that. I appreciate the accommodation, but I'd rather it be difficult. The -21 is sort of a perfect aircraft, in that regard. It hits a beautiful balance:

Easy to pick up, hard to master. But, as Rudel indicated:

Now...ED asked for flight Data. So he flew the real aircraft and recorded actual data (cross checked with DCS 21Bis), providing it to ED and proving that FM is at it's best. ED cares greatly about the FM of any aircraft in DCS. In the past 6 years, we haven't heard anything from ED regarding any FM errors.

It very well may be at that point. So, it'd seem to me that if there's any complaints with the FM? I'd honestly bring it up with ED, themselves.

It is realistic. More than any other commercialy available MIG-21bis simulation in the history. It's not perfect, but let's be honest - no simulation is perfect, nor any aircraft is.

I also think you misunderstood what Rudel said. Fm is realistic and backed up not only by paper but actual flight tests performed by experienced and skilled pilot with years of flying (you could compare it to the way Nick Grey compared real Spitfire with DCS version). The difference you are experiencing lies mostly in inputs and hardware which any of us is using.

Dolphin tried to explain that in FM thread. The "gameplay" and "fun" relates to that, meaning that in simulation how average person experiences machine depends not only on hard numbers which in this case are cross checked and backed up, but also on how FM reacts to inputs provided by your hand through hardware (which varies greatly among users, I for example have stick with extension and it differs greatly from my previous flying with short stick).

Dolphin tried to eplain that by giving example of roll rate and oscillation where due to your feedback, the effect of input was changed.

It is realistic. More than any other commercialy available MIG-21bis simulation in the history. It's not perfect, but let's be honest - no simulation is perfect, nor any aircraft is.

Not to be a downer, but that's not the highest bar; the MiG-21's usual representation in sims can best be described as "digital shooting clay." :joystick:

Will MAC have the same level of simulation as standard DCS? I want to keep the challenge of maneuvering around in the MiG 21.

As I understand, flight model is the same, you just won't have clickable cockpit...

It is realistic. More than any other commercialy available MIG-21bis simulation in the history. It's not perfect, but let's be honest - no simulation is perfect, nor any aircraft is.

 

I also think you misunderstood what Rudel said. Fm is realistic and backed up not only by paper but actual flight tests performed by experienced and skilled pilot with years of flying (you could compare it to the way Nick Grey compared real Spitfire with DCS version). The difference you are experiencing lies mostly in inputs and hardware which any of us is using.

Dolphin tried to explain that in FM thread. The "gameplay" and "fun" relates to that, meaning that in simulation how average person experiences machine depends not only on hard numbers which in this case are cross checked and backed up, but also on how FM reacts to inputs provided by your hand through hardware (which varies greatly among users, I for example have stick with extension and it differs greatly from my previous flying with short stick).

Dolphin tried to eplain that by giving example of roll rate and oscillation where due to your feedback, the effect of input was changed.

It's nice that Dolphin was flexible enough to adjust the FM based on user experience, but the variety of hardware devices and combinations would have become plain during that process yeah? Users use the same variety of hardware with other modules but they seem to get better results, any idea why? Are there any further significant adjustments that will be made?

Not trying to be *that guy*, I just happen to have been looking at learning this module again and trying to nail down where the flight model is and where it might foreseeably go.

Dolphin created the 21Bis FM as best as possible based on charts and his own experiences. He combined the two resulting in mixed feelings from users.

 

The FM went through so many changes because (although a simulation), he wanted to keep a fun factor in it. The 21Bis is not an easy aircraft to fly at all, despite its simplicity in the cockpit. And he took that into consideration, so he adjusted the FM. Yet, user still complained, so he adjusted it more to user likings; and thus other users complained because it may not be to their liking. So he adjusts it again, and the same continues guys.

 

Then there are the users explaining their results based on manuals, hear-say, videos, etc. Or even their own experiences as maintenance crew. Although great research is being presented, it does not always beat a pilot's experiences. And that's what Novak wanted users to feel. How a pilot does. Not only is he a pilot, but he trained others, and I'm pretty sure he put the student through their paces.

 

Now...ED asked for flight Data. So he flew the real aircraft and recorded actual data (cross checked with DCS 21Bis), providing it to ED and proving that FM is at it's best. ED cares greatly about the FM of any aircraft in DCS. In the past 6 years, we haven't heard anything from ED regarding any FM errors.

Sorry but, if users wanted a 'fun factor" they wouldn't come looking for a study sim. The fact the MiG-21 is a difficult aircraft is in itself the fun factor. By modifying that, not only you made an unrealistic FM, but you also betrayed the very first selling point of your product: realism.

There are a number of big question marks on this FM, and no real pilot claim can go against logic and physics.

- The fact you shouldn't be able to steer the aircraft on the ground just by using the rudder at less than 5 knots... where is that aerodynamic force coming from???

- The fact the afterburner provides instant acceleration as soon as the throttle is pushed past the detent, while in reality it wouldn't even be lit yet, because the nozzle actuator is still opening...

- The critical AoA that went through unbelievably huge changes throughout the years, we could fly level at 50 degrees AoA, now it stalls at 18 or something like that...

I mean, how can we trust this?

the main thing i am afraid of is: how can you spot the difference if the plane you have as your enemy is an original high fidelity MiG21, or a MAC-MiG21?

and does the MAC-MiG21 have other advantages over the original one?

do they have all-hitting-magic missiles?

as bkthunder said, the main reason to go for this study sim is - to study the planes and the usage of them.

i hope future MP servers will have the possibility to allow / decline MAC modules

The difference is like A-10A and A-10C when it comes how do you select a weapon or how you operate landing gear...

the main thing i am afraid of is: how can you spot the difference if the plane you have as your enemy is an original high fidelity MiG21, or a MAC-MiG21?

and does the MAC-MiG21 have other advantages over the original one?

do they have all-hitting-magic missiles?

 

as bkthunder said, the main reason to go for this study sim is - to study the planes and the usage of them.

i hope future MP servers will have the possibility to allow / decline MAC modules

--

I usually post from my phone so please excuse any typos, inappropriate punctuation and capitalization, missing words and general lack of cohesion and sense in my posts.....

My guess is there's no motivation for various interpretations to have different flight models. Users that fly either will want the full bore flight model. People drive Gran Turismo cars with more sophisticated physics models from their couch with Playstation controllers while eating potato chips all the time. Physical stick and rudder is something the arcade types are equal if not better at than the sim types. If it's all you do you get some practice.

It's the telephone switch board operator routine that makes the LO crowd's eyes glaze over.

Dolphin created the 21Bis FM as best as possible based on charts and his own experiences. He combined the two resulting in mixed feelings from users.

 

The FM went through so many changes because (although a simulation), he wanted to keep a fun factor in it. The 21Bis is not an easy aircraft to fly at all, despite its simplicity in the cockpit. And he took that into consideration, so he adjusted the FM. Yet, user still complained, so he adjusted it more to user likings; and thus other users complained because it may not be to their liking. So he adjusts it again, and the same continues guys.

 

Then there are the users explaining their results based on manuals, hear-say, videos, etc. Or even their own experiences as maintenance crew. Although great research is being presented, it does not always beat a pilot's experiences. And that's what Novak wanted users to feel. How a pilot does. Not only is he a pilot, but he trained others, and I'm pretty sure he put the student through their paces.

 

Now...ED asked for flight Data. So he flew the real aircraft and recorded actual data (cross checked with DCS 21Bis), providing it to ED and proving that FM is at it's best. ED cares greatly about the FM of any aircraft in DCS. In the past 6 years, we haven't heard anything from ED regarding any FM errors.

And, IMO, herein lies the problem. If the flight model was correctly constructed from manuals and an active duty pilot's experiences, and was fitting in with documentation and other sorts of evidence put forth by people, why change it to please "community" at all? If anything, this sounds kind of unacceptable for me and probably quite a few others preferring this sim/module as it sounds like : "it may not be realistic but the people want it fly that way, so we make it that way".

Anyway, it is clear that this is beating a dead horse at this point, so... cheers...

The FM went through so many changes because (although a simulation), he wanted to keep a fun factor in it. The 21Bis is not an easy aircraft to fly at all, despite its simplicity in the cockpit. And he took that into consideration, so he adjusted the FM.

No, just no. If I knew that I would have never bought it in the first place.

Oh boy, Leatherneck have opened up a whole can of worms now ! As if they didn't have enough bad press already.

Still my favourite in DCS though and still an incredibly popular aircraft in MP servers e.g. Cold War Server.

What can of worm ?

It is realistic.

...

I also think you misunderstood what Rudel said. Fm is realistic and backed up not only by paper but actual flight tests performed by experienced and skilled pilot with years of flying

...

experiencing lies mostly in inputs and hardware which any of us is using.

Dolphin tried to explain that in FM thread. The "gameplay" and "fun" relates to that, meaning that in simulation how average person experiences machine depends not only on hard numbers which in this case are cross checked and backed up, but also on how FM reacts to inputs provided by your hand through hardware (which varies greatly among users, I for example have stick with extension and it differs greatly from my previous flying with short stick).

Dolphin tried to eplain that by giving example of roll rate and oscillation where due to your feedback, the effect of input was changed.

The topic in question : https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=185392 for the ones like me who need their memory refreshed.